Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 32
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,087
    Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
    Actually, the 3x is a far cry better than the 1.4x. Personally, raw glass is always best. It's the ticket you have to pay for this glass I have a problem with.
    That's only if you buy crappy teleconverters.
    E-510
    E-1
    Zuiko 14-54 F2.8-3.5 MkI
    Zuiko 70-300 F4.0-5.6
    Konica Hexanon 52mm F1.8
    Cullmann 2503
    Benro KS-0

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    8,163
    What's an "optical purist"?

    Is that someone who likes quality?
    Ouch.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,087
    Quote Originally Posted by cdifoto View Post
    What's an "optical purist"?

    Is that someone who likes quality?
    Someone who wouldn't put a throwaway teleconverter between a $1000 piece of glass and a $1000 camera body?
    E-510
    E-1
    Zuiko 14-54 F2.8-3.5 MkI
    Zuiko 70-300 F4.0-5.6
    Konica Hexanon 52mm F1.8
    Cullmann 2503
    Benro KS-0

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560

    Red face It is a corn-fusing world!

    Exactly, 'jekostas" ... according to you and the "others", if you are not willing to spend the $500 for T/Cs and whatnot ... STOP shooting images. Just STOP it.

    According to these "pursists", they ask, "What is wrong with you people? If you you are not willing to pony up top dollar for the best and brightest, you are not worthy to post anything! STOP SHOOTING IMAGES!"

    Thanks guys, for making the point. I knew I could count on ya! Some folks are soooooo predictable. Name:  nodding satified yes.gif
Views: 64
Size:  4.8 KB

    Although I will admit, it is darn nice to have a $1000 optic to go to, when you need it. In fact, having several is a fine option, too. Criipes, why not the whole bag? Oh yeah, that costs real money... Oh, where's the U.S. Senate and House of Reps when you need 'em, eh? They can spend our tax money like hogs to slaughter of innocents. What not throw top drawer glass for all good little girls and boys in an amendment? Just watch what happens this week! Abortions ... and everyone gets to pay for it. Now, that's a good use of my hard earned cash, birth control on MY dime. You play, I pay! Gee, thanks. May I have another?



    The biggest problem you face using T/Cs is that dedicated or matched teleconverters are specially design for certain lenses to achieve optimum performance. There are only 3 dedicated/matched teleconverters for Minolta AF:

    1. Minolta APO / Sony APO
    2. Kenko Pro 300 (Pro 300 DG) / Tamron SP
    3. Sigma EX / EX DG

    Dedicated/Matched teleconverters are only for specific lens because the distance between the first element and the mount is much shorter than 8-9mm therefore it will not physically fit with all lenses.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 11-20-2009 at 04:10 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560

    Smile Movin' on ...

    Okay ... let's say the "purists" win ... and we have to use REAL lenses ... and not some bastardized version of something we are toting around due to weight constraints and vacation locales ...

    How much we talkin'?

    OKAY ...

    SIGMA APO 500mm F4.5 EX DG/HSM (7 lbs) -> $4,099
    SIGMA APO 800mm f5.6 EX DG HSM (10.5 lbs) -> oops, no SONY-mount. If there were, $6799

    Of course these bazooka-shaped pipes are an easy tote (NOT). With the use of SIGMA EX T/Cs, you can vary their length.

    Sigma 824205 Sigma 1.4X EX DG APO Teleconverter for Minolta/Sony AF -> $209
    Sigma 876205 Sigma 2X EX DG APO Teleconverter for Minolta/Sony AF -> $259

    Sigma EX Teleconverter

    The Sigma EX teleconverter or EX DG is a dedicated teleconverter designed for Sigma EX series telephoto and telephoto lenses:
    http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/len...le.asp#minolta

    Like other dedicated/matched teleconverter, its front element also sticks out of the lens tube. The Sigma APO EX DG teleconverters lens element actually stick out between 2-3mm beyond the lens mount and therefore it will not fit all lenses.

    Note: Sigma has now introduced HSM lenses for Sony but according to users report the current Sigma 1.4X or 2X EX DG teleconverters are not compatible with its HSM lenses. Sigma is planning to introduce new teleconverters that are compatible with HSM lenses but the exact release date is still TBD.


    and coming up with a 720mm f/6.3 and a 1000mm f/9 for the SIGMA 500mm f/4.5

    and if we could actually get a SIGMA 800mm f/5.6, make up a 1120mm f/8 and a 1600mm f/11

    These have to be amazing to see on a backpack. Probably would look more like "rocket-man."

    Anyway ... real lenses eliminate the T/C conundrum, but are quite limited in the SONY realm. Getting out there can be a chore, no matter what you pick, at this point. I sense that next year, things will change, once again, when it comes to the LONG SHOT. So, we live with fuzziness and smile.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 11-20-2009 at 04:15 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,424
    if you want to prove your point, take an ACTUAL shot of something decent with that setup to shut everyone up.

    if i want that sort of range, the money is better spent on a superzoom imo.
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,087
    Or, you could just not use teleconverters and work with the glass you have.

    I know, I know, strange thought.
    E-510
    E-1
    Zuiko 14-54 F2.8-3.5 MkI
    Zuiko 70-300 F4.0-5.6
    Konica Hexanon 52mm F1.8
    Cullmann 2503
    Benro KS-0

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560
    I'll remember to tell the ship's captain to pull in a little closer to that ICEBERG, as I get a shot of the polar bear sipping on the real thing.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,424
    so show us a shot of the polar bear.
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Wild, Wonderful, Wyoming
    Posts
    1,043
    And, what good is the shot of that polar bear if you have to explain to everyone that views it, "that's a shot of a polar bear" because it's so blurry and lacking in contrast they can't tell what it is?
    It's painful to see a 3x teleconverter put on such a nice piece of glass.
    A good photograph is knowing where to stand.
    Ansel Adams

    Rule books are paper, they will not cushion a sudden meeting of stone and metal.
    Ernest K. Gann-Fate is the Hunter.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •